MADDOW: I was thinking about that as we see Eric Cantor and these other Republican Congressmen denouncing the Occupy Wall Street people as, you know, an angry mob and somehow dangerous to the country. I wonder if a sense of dangerousness is what gives them power.

BILL MAHER: Well, yeah, I think so. I don’t think anyone feels that we’re in a country like so many in the world. Let’s remember we are luckier than most where violence is really going to rule the day and effect policy. But, yeah, people can be intimidated by that kind of thing. I mean, this idea that they’re marching now on millionaires’ homes, I couldn’t help but think of that scene in the Martin Scorsese movie “Gangs of New York” where the riots break out in New York and Martin Scorsese has that cameo where he plays the rich guy. You know, he’s in his Fifth Avenue apartment and a brick comes through the window. Well, you know, if a brick came through Rupert Murdoch’s apartment, yes, I have a feeling Fox News would be a lot more gentle on the Wall Street people.

MADDOW: [Laughs]

Bookmark this for future reference the next time you see crocodile tears cried over violent language such as “targeting” a political opponent.

P.S. Y’all are aware that Neal Rauhauser has a role in this OccupyWallStreet movement, right? And that he is working closely these days with convicted bomber Brett Kimberlin?

Rauhauser shares the joint account @WeOccupyAmerica on Twitter and seems to have been playing a major role in its operation. He tweeted a picture of himself with Jesse LaGreca, whom the movement regards as a hero for griping at a Fox News reporter.

His workings with Kimberlin are quite a story. You have about a month to listen? Sorry, I don’t currently have about a month to tell it, at least right now.

you see crocodile tears cried over violent language such as “targeting” a political opponent.

I wouldn’t be as bothered by liberals like Bill Maher if I knew they at least didn’t fall for the notion their ideology imbued them with such great humaneness, tolerance, generosity and compassion. Or that they had those qualities above and beyond what’s found in their political opposites.

At the very least, I want them and everyone else to always be aware of surveys that indicate a higher percentage of those on the left actually, in fact, is less generous (in donating money, time and even blood) than conservatives. More tellingly, that a higher percentage of liberals apparently is more likely to believe blacks are intrinsically less capable than whites, and that it’s okay for neighborhoods to be segregated.

P.S. Y’all are aware that Neal Rauhauser has a role in this OccupyWallStreet movement, right? And that he is working closely these days with convicted bomber Brett Kimberlin?

No, I didn’t know that. Why am I not surprised?

BILL MAHER: Well, yeah, I think so. I don’t think anyone feels that we’re in a country like so many in the world. Let’s remember we are luckier than most where violence is really going to rule the day and effect policy. But, yeah, people can be intimidated by that kind of thing. I mean, this idea that they’re marching now on millionaires’ homes, I couldn’t help but think of that scene in the Martin Scorsese movie “Gangs of New York” where the riots break out in New York and Martin Scorsese has that cameo where he plays the rich guy. You know, he’s in his Fifth Avenue apartment and a brick comes through the window. Well, you know, if a brick came through Rupert Murdoch’s apartment, yes, I have a feeling Fox News would be a lot more gentle on the Wall Street people.

Is it just me, or does anyone else have trouble parsing that into anything sensible? I’m not trying to be funny, I seriously do not understand what Maher is saying; it’s like he’s speaking a foreign language. Patterico seems to see some sort of wish for violence there, but I have trouble even seeing that, except vaguely. Why does he think that FOX would be more kindly inclined to these thugs if they were to assault its owner? Is it because FOX staff don’t like their boss, or what? I could understand Murdoch being frightened by a threat of violence, but surely actual violence against him would only serve to make him angry and harden his line, wouldn’t it?

Y’all are aware that Neal Rauhauser has a role in this OccupyWallStreet movement, right?

I’m not surprised. What else is he going to do? All theses guys have so little in their lives, which I think is a big reason they act like they have nothing to lose.

In fact, I distinctly recall Neal boasting that he had nothing to lose while comparing himself to someone like Patterico who has worked hard to build a life for himself.

Maddow and Maher understand full well what they are doing. Before we have real reforms in this country, they will do their part to foment riots. Isn’t Maddow’s new colleague Al Sharpton? So they have a riot mentor.

Sure, the real nasty guys are the lowly criminals and thugs with nothing to lose, but I personally hold pundits almost as accountable for this kind of cheerleading.

I wouldn’t be surprised if Fox does get a brick thrown through the window now.

In Bill Ayers America, Maddow and Meher would be among the intial group of “useful idiots” consigned to the “re-education camps”, just as their counterparts were in the ’20’s Soviet Union by Lenin/Trotsky/Stalin.

Maher makes noise about being a libertarian (liberal side) because of his support for legalizing drugs & prostitution. One imagines that if this ever cane to be the taxes on both would wipe out his retirement fund.

BTW, for those outside of the Democratik People’s Republik of Kalifornia,
We have had a shooting in a hair-salon in Seal Beach CA (just down the road from Long Beach) with 6 deaths, 3 in Intensive-Care, and the shooter in custody – it looks like a “domestic dispute”.

The thing I remember about that area of Seal Beach, Chuck, is that is where an old “gambling casino/night-club” from the ’40’s was located just as you crossed the river on the inland side.
It stayed empty and unused for most of the 50’s, 60’s & 70’s; and always had an unsavory reputation/history.

After the fawning and excuses being made a couple of days ago on Fox and Friends. I haven’t been awake to watch since, but that morning you would have thought they were paid spokespersons for OWS. I don’t know how Fox could get much more gentle than that morning.

In this article the L.A. Times uses the same inflammatory rhetoric they accused Palin of using to incite violence. The article talks about Governor Brown placing himself in the “cross-hairs” of 2nd amendment activist. I guess its okay for the L.A. Times to use such dangerous rhetoric when speaking about 2nd Amendment advocates. http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-brown-guns-20111011,0,5655548.story

I’ve noticed that they fantasize a lot about attacks, “hate sex” and assassinations on those whom they perceive to be conservatives.

Ultimately you have to blame and hold accountable the ceos of the companies that promote these evil people. Comcast, GE, Bill Gates, HBO, and the like. These people need to be brought to justice because they are the bin ladens and the Mahers are just the hijackers with the box cutters. We’re just always letting these lowlife ceos off the hook for some reason, as if they aren’t the ones who are directly responsible for the threats and incitements.

* Directed at “leaders” attempting to abrogate a right (bear arms), not citizens exercising a right (free press).

* Proposed to short circuit, not to initiate, more violence.

* A demand to be left alone, not to be taken care of.

* Promulgated by someone seen as being on the fringe, not a major media figure. (Mike has since become a leader in exposing the Gunwalker scandal, a gross betrayal of the Constitution by those sworn to uphold it that deserves literal tar and feathers, if not ropes and trees.)

And yet Maher gets laughter and cheers from those who booed and castigated Vanderbeogh.

but surely actual violence against him would only serve to make him angry and harden his line, wouldn’t it?

Not if you’re of the typical libtard sheep mindset, milhouse. Liberal sheep think the thing to do is cower and run when faced with violence. Actually responding with strength and force to violence is beyond their reckoning capacity.

So a liberaltarian f-tard like Maher presumes that, faced with violence, Murdoch would buckle and cower in trepidation.

Was he ever a libertarian? I thought he was just claiming to be one because it sounded good, and he had no idea what it meant.

milhouse has this one correct, Aaron. Maher was never a libertarian, he was at best a “liberaltarian” — he “agreed/sided with” with libertarianism in those areas where it matched up with liberalism, but with liberals anywhere libertarianism differed.

It’s exactly the same thing as a liberal, but it gives you chops in certain circles that you’d lack if you acked you were actually a liberal.